Cyclic Fatigue Resistance of 'Replica-Like" and Original Reciprocating Instruments in Single and Double Curvatures.

IF 1.6 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Celia Tarragó, Oliver Valencia De Pablo, Gaizka Loroño, Antonio Conde, Ruth Perez Alfayate, Giampiero Rossi Fedele, Jorge Vera, Roberto Estevez
{"title":"Cyclic Fatigue Resistance of 'Replica-Like\" and Original Reciprocating Instruments in Single and Double Curvatures.","authors":"Celia Tarragó, Oliver Valencia De Pablo, Gaizka Loroño, Antonio Conde, Ruth Perez Alfayate, Giampiero Rossi Fedele, Jorge Vera, Roberto Estevez","doi":"10.14744/eej.2025.85547","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the cyclic fatigue resistance of conventional and heat-treated \"replica-like\" reciprocating instruments with their original counterparts under single and double curvatures and assess tip size discrepancies against manufacturer-reported values.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eighteen instruments were used per group for the study. Two measurements at the instrument's tip were made with a digital calliper. Cyclic fatigue resistance was evaluated under single (60°, 5 mm radius) and double curvatures (60°, 5 mm radius each) in a 37°C water bath. Time to fracture (seconds) was recorded and analysed with appropriate statistical tests (p=0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The tip sizes of all instruments were smaller than the value purported by the manufacturers (0.25 mm) and outside the range of values obtained, with significant differences for all groups (p<0.001). Time to fracture were as follows: Reciproc R25: single curvature: 171.5+-38.9, double curvature: 133.4+-47.4; Reverso Silver: single curvature: 169.0+-104.8, double curvature: 57.8+-20.0; Reciproc Blue R25 single curvature: 355.4+-86.4, double curvature: 140.5+-67.7; Reverso Blue: single curvature: 359.5+-102.8, double curvature: 142.9+-69.0. Reverso Silver presented with a significantly lower time to fracture overall when compared with the Blue instruments (p=0.002) and with all instruments in double curvatures (p<0.05). In single curvatures, blue files had longer times to fracture (p<0.05). When comparing single versus double curvatures, only Reciproc R25 had no significant differences regarding time to fracture (p=0.54).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The tip sizes of the instrument tested were smaller than what is reported by the manufacturers. The cyclic fatigue resistance of the conventional 'replica-like' instrument (Reverso Silver) was significantly lower than the blue \"heat-treated\" comparators. Double curvature hastened fracture. (EEJ-2024-11-174).</p>","PeriodicalId":11860,"journal":{"name":"European Endodontic Journal","volume":"10 3","pages":"237-241"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12102773/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Endodontic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/eej.2025.85547","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the cyclic fatigue resistance of conventional and heat-treated "replica-like" reciprocating instruments with their original counterparts under single and double curvatures and assess tip size discrepancies against manufacturer-reported values.

Methods: Eighteen instruments were used per group for the study. Two measurements at the instrument's tip were made with a digital calliper. Cyclic fatigue resistance was evaluated under single (60°, 5 mm radius) and double curvatures (60°, 5 mm radius each) in a 37°C water bath. Time to fracture (seconds) was recorded and analysed with appropriate statistical tests (p=0.05).

Results: The tip sizes of all instruments were smaller than the value purported by the manufacturers (0.25 mm) and outside the range of values obtained, with significant differences for all groups (p<0.001). Time to fracture were as follows: Reciproc R25: single curvature: 171.5+-38.9, double curvature: 133.4+-47.4; Reverso Silver: single curvature: 169.0+-104.8, double curvature: 57.8+-20.0; Reciproc Blue R25 single curvature: 355.4+-86.4, double curvature: 140.5+-67.7; Reverso Blue: single curvature: 359.5+-102.8, double curvature: 142.9+-69.0. Reverso Silver presented with a significantly lower time to fracture overall when compared with the Blue instruments (p=0.002) and with all instruments in double curvatures (p<0.05). In single curvatures, blue files had longer times to fracture (p<0.05). When comparing single versus double curvatures, only Reciproc R25 had no significant differences regarding time to fracture (p=0.54).

Conclusion: The tip sizes of the instrument tested were smaller than what is reported by the manufacturers. The cyclic fatigue resistance of the conventional 'replica-like' instrument (Reverso Silver) was significantly lower than the blue "heat-treated" comparators. Double curvature hastened fracture. (EEJ-2024-11-174).

“仿制品”和原装往复仪表在单曲率和双曲率下的抗循环疲劳性能。
目的:比较传统和热处理的“仿制品”往复仪器与原始仪器在单曲率和双曲率下的抗循环疲劳性能,并评估尖端尺寸与制造商报告值的差异。方法:每组使用18种仪器进行研究。在仪器的尖端用数字卡尺进行了两次测量。在37°C水浴中对单曲率(60°,5 mm半径)和双曲率(60°,5 mm半径)的循环疲劳抗力进行了评估。记录骨折时间(秒)并进行相应的统计学检验(p=0.05)。结果:所有仪器的尖端尺寸均小于制造商声称的值(0.25 mm),并且超出了所获得的值范围,各组之间存在显著差异(p结论:测试仪器的尖端尺寸小于制造商报告的尺寸。传统的“仿制品”仪器(Reverso Silver)的抗循环疲劳性明显低于蓝色的“热处理”比较器。双曲率加速断裂。(eej - 2024 - 11 - 174)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Endodontic Journal
European Endodontic Journal DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.60%
发文量
25
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信